My guess is that virtually everyone believes in free will. However, we certainly think of it (and especially its role in decision making and morality) in different ways. We also explain its origin differently. Unlike two people looking at a tree or a rock, two people reflecting on abstracts like free will can perceive very different things, I think.

That's great. The question with respect to your attitude toward secularism is then whether you would acknowledge the possibility that other people feel the same way about their "pagan" religions and are equally fulfilled by them. Does it seem impossible, possible but irrelevant, empirically disconfirmed, or what? The first hurdle is what the "pagan" philosophers call the principle of charity, the idea that we should assume that the other side is being rational and honest and that it makes sense to see why and how they are being rational and honest, rather than assuming that their reasoning is just the devil trying to tempt us.

It may well be that human nature drives us to make our religions exclusive, once we have made them part of our identity. I see a similar thing happening with nationalism. However, I would arge that it isn't true of logical neccessity. Many scholars argue persuasively that there are common themes in religion and mythology that reveal a universal architecture to the human mind and spirit. We don't have to see religions as mutually exclusive, although there is a tendency to do so.

You don't condemn others, yet they judge you. Very well. I think nearly everyone would make the same claim.

Have you ever considered the remote possibility that you might be operating under a selection bias here? That when people find other religions to be equally fulfilling that you simply don't hear their words or believe what they say is in their heart? Even if it was true that you had discovered the religion that brings greatest fulfillment to the greatest number of people, it could be explained by one religion being a more effective "opiate of the masses" than others. A more seductive temptation. Isn't it possible that most religions see the others in this way as temptations from the truth?

I don't see an argument here against secularism as I have defined it, in fact I see your argument as supporting it. You want the freedom to pursue the religion you find so fulfilling.

If you grant that I want the same thing but that I might find something different to be fulfilling, then we have no argument left on this particular point. If you think it is your moral responsibility to work to deny that to me, then we are at odds with each other.

The secular philosophy at its core is intended to avoid that contention, although like anything else it can be applied overly aggressively and effectively make the presumably "neutral" zone so large that it impinges on freedoms. Aligned with identity politics, for example, or "political correctness" it can itself become oppresssive. Philosophies and ideologies are no replacement for wisdom.

My best to you as well.

peace and joy,

Todd